NFL Draft Prospect Michael Sam comes out

[buckeye]

I think Green Bay would be a good place for him going by your post. Small town away from the major media. Strong leadership from GM down through the coaching staff, with a good locker room.

Exactly, somewhere far from the normal day to day media circus....

 

[PP]

San Fransisco would be a good place for him. City embraces homosexuals.

I wouldn't mind him coming to the Pats either especially if hes sitting on the board in the 4th and 5th round because teams tanked on him.

 

[JOHNNYTHECLOWN]

I'm waiting for an active player to come out now, beat this kid to the punch as the FIRST NFL player to come out

 

[Hasselbeck]

who cares......
everybody here knows somebody that is gay.
family, friend or co-worker.

it shouldnt bother most people in the nfl; owners to coaches to players.
they care about; if he can play and produce.
you are crazy if you think there arent gays now in the NFL.



Sent from x0xHumblex0x's Samsung GALAXY Note II;
MFer

That ideally should be the mindset on someones sexuality, but you have idiots like rams who think this guy can "pray the gay away" and that an individuals sexuality should determine what rights you do and do not have.. and that makes people like Michael Sam quite hesitant to come out and live the life that will bring them the most happiness.

 

[calgaryballer]

Any GM that says they focus on drafting 'high character' players and then doesn't feel comfortable putting a gay player in the locker room in 2014 should lose their job. You've basically just implied that you've drafted a room full of bigots who can't handle someone that's slightly different from themselves.

And I'm sure they'll play the 'I don't want a gay dude hitting on me all the time' card. Guess what? He doesn't want you! He wants a GAY partner. After the first week of showers, I imagine seeing your teammates dongs will lose it's appeal, especially if they're all harassing you. With this announcement, Sam has basically guaranteed he can get a date with whichever man he wants.

 

[bucky]

That ideally should be the mindset on someones sexuality, but you have idiots like rams who think this guy can "pray the gay away" and that an individuals sexuality should determine what rights you do and do not have.. and that makes people like Michael Sam quite hesitant to come out and live the life that will bring them the most happiness.

Reading Rams posts, I think he expects and feels the right to force others to believe in his god and his gods rules. That's the problem I have with Rams. I don't have a problem with him believing homosexuality is a sin against his god. I have a problem with him believing in oppression.

I've seen gay rights being compared to civil rights on this site and other places. There are similarities, but I see a significant difference between the two. Back then, with civil rights, the belief was in oppression. The belief was in oppression itself against blacks. And that was from the voting majority. I really believe that the voting majority today are reasonable enough to be against oppression. They just don't realize that trying to preserve marriage as being between a man and woman, and having the Govt. enforce this, is actually oppression/oppresive.

I really think that reasonable people can be made to realize that they can preserve the sacredness and sanctity of there religious marriage (between man and woman) and have there religion define marriage FOR THEM, and realize that Govt should not. That Govt should only define the legalities of marriage, like taxes and insurance. I believe people can be made to see that the Govt defining anything more than that is legislating lifestyle which is legislating oppression.

I really believe that reasonable people can, through reasonable discussion, be made to see this and realize, no matter what there religious beliefs are, they have no right to tell others how to live.

Back in the day of Civil Rights, the belief was in oppression itself. That's the significant difference I see between civil and gay rights. Just my opinion.

The extreme, holding the god hates fags signs are beyond reason. The gay rights groups need to work on the reasonable religious ones that can make that separation between what I believe is not what others have to believe. Especially on such an opinion based issue as "homosexuality is a sin". To make it something that is fact based and not opinion based, first you would have to prove that GOD does or does not exist. Good luck with that. Until then, the issue is opinion based with neither sides belief being any more right or wrong than the other. But it is wrong when belief crosses the line into oppression.

 

[ram29jackson]

That ideally should be the mindset on someones sexuality, but you have idiots like rams who think this guy can "pray the gay away" and that an individuals sexuality should determine what rights you do and do not have.. and that makes people like Michael Sam quite hesitant to come out and live the life that will bring them the most happiness.

I haven't insulted you in this conversation and I haven't given a term paper on my views and i'm not going that deep into it.
You need to to take it down a notch. I haven't said a damn thing about religion in this. I have said purely from a business and scouting level and the fact people don't want controversy, he wont make the cut.

 

[ram29jackson]

Reading Rams posts, I think he expects and feels the right to force others to believe in his god and his gods rules. That's the problem I have with Rams. I don't have a problem with him believing homosexuality is a sin against his god. I have a problem with him believing in oppression.

I've seen gay rights being compared to civil rights on this site and other places. There are similarities, but I see a significant difference between the two. Back then, with civil rights, the belief was in oppression. The belief was in oppression itself against blacks. And that was from the voting majority. I really believe that the voting majority today are reasonable enough to be against oppression. They just don't realize that trying to preserve marriage as being between a man and woman, and having the Govt. enforce this, is actually oppression/oppresive.

I really think that reasonable people can be made to realize that they can preserve the sacredness and sanctity of there religious marriage (between man and woman) and have there religion define marriage FOR THEM, and realize that Govt should not. That Govt should only define the legalities of marriage, like taxes and insurance. I believe people can be made to see that the Govt defining anything more than that is legislating lifestyle which is legislating oppression.

I really believe that reasonable people can, through reasonable discussion, be made to see this and realize, no matter what there religious beliefs are, they have no right to tell others how to live.

Back in the day of Civil Rights, the belief was in oppression itself. That's the significant difference I see between civil and gay rights. Just my opinion.

The extreme, holding the god hates fags signs are beyond reason. The gay rights groups need to work on the reasonable religious ones that can make that separation between what I believe is not what others have to believe. Especially on such an opinion based issue as "homosexuality is a sin". To make it something that is fact based and not opinion based, first you would have to prove that GOD does or does not exist. Good luck with that. Until then, the issue is opinion based with neither sides belief being any more right or wrong than the other. But it is wrong when belief crosses the line into oppression.

you also are claiming things I have never said or talked about in great detail. LOL at your oppression comment.

 

[Youk]

Ryan Clark brought up a valid point that we have avoided a little here, mainly about the ribbing that each player receives, and where the line will be for him.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...ant-to-know-what-they-can-say-to-michael-sam/

“You want to know how you can behave around this person,” Clark said. “Anyone who has been in a football locker room knows that there’s a lot of jokes, a lot of ribbing. We’ll talk about anything. If a guy is fat. If a guy is ugly. If a guy’s significant other is not attractive. These are things you josh each other about and you talk with each other about. In what ways can you talk to him? In what ways can you involve him in your conversations? What are the things you can do and say around him that won’t make him uncomfortable? That won’t make him feel that he’s being ostracized? Or that won’t make him feel like he’s being harassed or quote, unquote bullied?”

 

[seaplus]

he wont make the cut.

we have a ram's prediction

opcorn:

 

[ram29jackson]

I think Green Bay would be a good place for him going by your post. Small town away from the major media. Strong leadership from GM down through the coaching staff, with a good locker room.

LOL Green Bay is not a pro gay area by any stretch of the imagination.
LOL at all these suggestions as to a good place he can play. He isn't going to make the cut and if he is equal to the talent of another player that player will get the chance and he wont.

 

[ram29jackson]

I'm OK with people disagreeing, as long as it's a tactful, respectful disagreement while we recognize that others opinions on lifestyle are not any more right or wrong than our own opinions and as long as we don't oppress others with different opinions on lifestyle.

It's not your disagreeing that I have a problem with. It's how you're opinions cross over into oppression that does.

LOL at your oppression comment. Saying "all gays need to go away or die or what ever and doing things to make that happen" is oppression. Giving an opinion that the NFL wont give him a chance and he probably isnt good enough anyway has nothing to do with oppression.

 

[Maynard]

there is a reason women and men dont shower together. the same would apply to a gay man showering with a straight man. If you dont think that is going to create issues in a locker then you are naive.
as a society we have come along way with gay rights and equal rights ect, but the NFL is a private fraternity and you just know players will take issue with this guy being in their locker room.

And people are forgetting the owners. there is a reason these old money owners only allow certain types of people in their group. they are old school bigots by nature and will have a huge problem with a gay man on their team.

while i applaud this player coming out, he should know he is no longer a football player, he is a gay rights activist and that dont pay the bills.

i do think the player will make a team because some owner is going to see it as $$$ and try and take advantage of that...like the jets love to do

 

[NAHSTE]

there is a reason women and men dont shower together. the same would apply to a gay man showering with a straight man. If you dont think that is going to create issues in a locker then you are naive.

:lol2:

Didn't seem to be an issue at Missouri.

 

[bucky]

LOL at your oppression comment. Saying "all gays need to go away or die or what ever and doing things to make that happen" is oppression. Giving an opinion that the NFL wont give him a chance and he probably isnt good enough anyway has nothing to do with oppression.

Did you vote for Same Sex Marriage? If not, your oppressing.

 

[Maynard]

:lol2:

Didn't seem to be an issue at Missouri.

how many people really knew about it though? if it was known, why the need to come out? im sure a few close friends knew and i understand he dated a swimmer, but idk if it was a male or female swimmer....lol

 

[Aso]

there is a reason women and men dont shower together. the same would apply to a gay man showering with a straight man. If you dont think that is going to create issues in a locker then you are naive.
as a society we have come along way with gay rights and equal rights ect, but the NFL is a private fraternity and you just know players will take issue with this guy being in their locker room.

And people are forgetting the owners. there is a reason these old money owners only allow certain types of people in their group. they are old school bigots by nature and will have a huge problem with a gay man on their team.

while i applaud this player coming out, he should know he is no longer a football player, he is a gay rights activist and that dont pay the bills.

i do think the player will make a team because some owner is going to see it as $$$ and try and take advantage of that...like the jets love to do

There was a Redskins O-lineman that played over 10 years and came out after he retired. Never a problem. Only problem that will occur is when a guy like Jonathan Vilma acts like a dumbass and makes a problem.

 

[ram29jackson]

Did you vote for Same Sex Marriage? If not, your oppressing.

I didn't vote on it either way quite frankly

 

[Maynard]

aso, nobody knew that player was gay until after he stopped playing. there are no openly gay players in the NFL.

not knowing you are playing with a gay man is different then knowing you are playing with a gay man

 

[NAHSTE]

how many people really knew about it though? if it was known, why the need to come out? im sure a few close friends knew and i understand he dated a swimmer, but idk if it was a male or female swimmer....lol

He told the entire team in August, dipshit. Was an open rumor on campus all year, the school paper even came close to running an interview with him about it but he decided against it.

Anyway, gonna steer clear of this thread from here because VSN lacks the intellect to treat this subject with its proper nuance. Have fun in the playpen.

:forgetit: